|
|
Post by BullRush on Sept 14, 2015 19:22:53 GMT
Doesn't that contravene league rules? I don't know but why would it? |
|
tango
Junior Member
Posts: 249 
|
Post by tango on Sept 14, 2015 19:40:11 GMT
Does it cover this far down ? F.a. Affiliated competition I suppose
|
|
|
|
Post by bullunitedfc on Sept 14, 2015 20:03:55 GMT
Doesn't that contravene league rules? I don't know but why would it? Does seem a little strange...but I guess nobody cares this low down! So, if we were to, for example, sell Pablo to Peterborough, we'd end up with nothing? |
|
|
|
Post by castlebull on Sept 14, 2015 20:12:04 GMT
Doesn't that contravene league rules? Howzat? Surely there's no wage cap down here? |
|
|
|
Post by BullRush on Sept 14, 2015 20:25:29 GMT
I don't know but why would it? Does seem a little strange...but I guess nobody cares this low down! So, if we were to, for example, sell Pablo to Peterborough, we'd end up with nothing? No, we hold his ownership so, depending on his contract, we would receive any transfer fee. His wage is allegedly being paid by somebody linked to the club. As I've said, it's purely what I've heard on the grapevine locally. Could be utter bollocks. |
|
|
|
Post by welshbull on Sept 14, 2015 20:48:43 GMT
Jamer was most likely one of the highest earners, and as the season has progressed it seems he wasn't quite making the level required of that kind of salary. So it seems sensible that with another high earner coming in, we let another go who wasn't quite justifying it.
I don't think it's a case of living right on the edge of our means, just a case of ensuring our budget is used efficiently.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2015 21:05:58 GMT
It's not really any of my business, but is everyone comfortable with individuals paying players rather than the club?
It just seems a bit strange.
Edit - obviously, I only ask as Bullrush has suggested that it may be the case. I am in no way suggesting this to be a fact.
|
|
|
|
Post by HamptonParkBull on Sept 14, 2015 21:12:43 GMT
It's not really any of my business, but is everyone comfortable with individuals paying players rather than the club? It just seems a bit strange. Edit - obviously, I only ask as Bullrush has suggested that it may be the case. I am in no way suggesting this to be a fact. If it's all legal and above board (which I'm sure it is) then no problem here. As long as the integrity of the club is not put at risk. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2015 21:15:00 GMT
It's not really any of my business, but is everyone comfortable with individuals paying players rather than the club? It just seems a bit strange. Edit - obviously, I only ask as Bullrush has suggested that it may be the case. I am in no way suggesting this to be a fact. It fills me with a certain amount of unease, I must admit. The model which we have been assured is the best fit for the club involved anonymous benevestors stumping up the start up cash for nothing a substantial shareholding in the club while the playing budget would be set based on a modest estimated income based in turn on conservative attendance figures, ensuring both prudence and sustainability. If BullRush's grapevine rumour is to be believed, this was either an outright lie, or the people running the club have no faith in the business model which we all voted for was the only option that was presented to us. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2015 21:19:01 GMT
It's not really any of my business, but is everyone comfortable with individuals paying players rather than the club? It just seems a bit strange. Edit - obviously, I only ask as Bullrush has suggested that it may be the case. I am in no way suggesting this to be a fact. If it's all legal and above board (which I'm sure it is) then no problem here. If true, I'm sure it is all above board. That wasn't really the question I was asking. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2015 21:21:41 GMT
Are we going to pick holes in everything HFC may or may not be doing?
|
|
|
|
Post by HamptonParkBull on Sept 14, 2015 21:23:15 GMT
If it's all legal and above board (which I'm sure it is) then no problem here. If true, I'm sure it is all above board. That wasn't really the question I was asking. Sorry I have updated my reply to include "not putting the integrity of the club at risk" |
|
|
|
Post by oldmeadowender on Sept 14, 2015 21:27:03 GMT
If this is the secret model, then I'm sure the benevestors can find enough money to pay the Spanish player I tried to get the club to look at. And find him a job locally in the financial sector too. And let's not talk about "the budget" any more. Let's talk about the "public budget" and the "secret budget." If we've got an undesirable club structure, let's at least use it to get promoted.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2015 21:31:30 GMT
The only thing I would say is that it would be good if all the fans knew what the situation was from the outset. All fans need to ensure that the club is being run sustainably considering what happened to Hereford United.
For example, most fans didn't realise (nor care) that Keyte was loaning the club money until it was too late.
Those are my thoughts on it. Although, of course it may not be true.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fownhope Bull on Sept 14, 2015 21:38:37 GMT
And this here's the rub...
After watching HUFC die, in large part due to overwhelming debts, and HFC rise from the ashes, the general consensus was, 'we must live well within our means'
But what happens when the season doesn't pan out as many had expected - the p***ing of a tin pot league doesn't materialise?
It doesn't matter what league you're in, when results don't go your way the response is to throw money at it - pundits on 5 Live this evening were adamant that Chelsea needed to get in some quality signings to sort the problem out.
Clearly our crowds are way above expectation and, for the money players are on at this level, we should be able to afford both - I suspect Jamer's release was for footballing reasons and his new job suggests this was not a sudden decision. But even so, at what point do fans hold their hands up and say, 'we go with what we've got'? Or do we keep spending money regardless? |
|
|
|
Post by oldmeadowender on Sept 14, 2015 21:42:16 GMT
And this here's the rub...
After watching HUFC die, in large part due to overwhelming debts, and HFC rise from the ashes, the general consensus was, 'we must live well within our means'
But what happens when the season doesn't pan out as many had expected - the p***ing of a tin pot league doesn't materialise?
It doesn't matter what league you're in, when results don't go your way the response is to throw money at it - pundits on 5 Live this evening were adamant that Chelsea needed to get in some quality signings to sort the problem out.
Clearly our crowds are way above expectation and, for the money players are on at this level, we should be able to afford both - I suspect Jamer's release was for footballing reasons and his new job suggests this was not a sudden decision. But even so, at what point do fans hold their hands up and say, 'we go with what we've got'? Or do we keep spending money regardless? Obviously you don't "spend money regardless." You protect your core income - the attendances - by making sure they want to keep coming back. On here, it seems you either have to be in favour of crazy spending or a poor match day experience. Madness. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2015 21:48:29 GMT
In my opinion, a club with 30 times the amount of fans of every other club in the league should be able to finish top without the need for external funding.
Obviously, whether or not the team actually finishes top is down to the manager and his selection of players.
|
|
beryl
Junior Member
Posts: 63
|
Post by beryl on Sept 14, 2015 21:54:47 GMT
I couldn't give a monkeys where they are being paid from and by whom. If it's not coming out of the club coffers all the better! Anything to get out of this league and up the pyramid will do me
|
|
|
|
Post by sortitoutwebbbull on Sept 14, 2015 21:58:27 GMT
If this is the secret model, then I'm sure the benevestors can find enough money to pay the Spanish player I tried to get the club to look at. And find him a job locally in the financial sector too. And let's not talk about "the budget" any more. Let's talk about the "public budget" and the "secret budget." If we've got an undesirable club structure, let's at least use it to get promoted. Tell us a bit more about Juan the man, and why, in your opinion, he would fit in to the local "financial sector" - you never know who might be reading this tonight |
|
|
|
Post by wrongguyguv on Sept 14, 2015 22:59:53 GMT
I had heard previously that Blandford was funding Mills and Heysham. Tony James clearly accepts that coming back after a year off at he age of 39 was a step too far. I was alarmed to read that the fifth 'benefactor' was needed to boost capital though. Ryan will be another £300 a week I suspect so we need to keep getting results. The most disappointing thing this week is the return of Pitman. He certainly spent Keyte's money for him. Wasn't it 40 players in one season? Should be held responsible for the old club's relegation in my view.
|
|
